Man convicted in Monaca cold-case homicide asks court for new trial

BEAVER — A Bridgewater man who is serving an eight- to 16-year sentence for a 1979 murder is asking the court to reverse his conviction and grant him a new trial.

Attorney Adam Cogan, who is representing Gregory Scott Hopkins, appeared before Beaver County Judge Harry Knafelc on Tuesday morning for a Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing. Hopkins waived his right to be present for the appeal hearing.

Hopkins, 71, was convicted in November 2013 of third-degree murder for the Sept. 1, 1979, strangulation of 23-year-old Catherine Janet Walsh in her Monaca home. It was a case that went unsolved for more than 30 years until DNA evidence led to the 2010 arrest of Hopkins, who was a businessman and Bridgewater councilman at the time.

Hopkins was charged with Walsh’s murder after police obtained a sample of his DNA from a discarded drinking cup tossed in a trash can at the Bridgewater municipal building. Hopkins would frequently stop in the municipal building, get a drink of water and toss his cup into a wastebasket. Investigators used the sample DNA, which matched DNA from the crime scene, to get a warrant to compel Hopkins to give a complete DNA sample.

The DNA evidence was key in the trial.

Cogan called two expert witnesses to dispute testimony given at trial by forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht on behalf of the prosecution. Wecht testified to the location of Hopkins’ DNA at the crime scene and used that to form an opinion about when the DNA had been deposited. Wecht stated he believed the DNA had been deposited at the time of Walsh’s death. Hopkins had admitted to being with Walsh in her home three weeks before her murder, and the defense argued that is when his DNA was left there.

Dr. David Fowler, a forensic pathologist who is the chief medical examiner in Baltimore, and Dr. Kim Collins, a physician and forensic and autopsy pathologist from South Carolina, both testified there is no scientific basis behind Wecht’s opinion about the time of the DNA deposit. Fowler also said Wecht’s testimony was outside the scope of what a medical examiner would determine.

Collins said that “science doesn’t allow” for Wecht to make the conclusions he did regarding the time of the DNA deposit. She also testified regarding the concentration of Hopkins’ DNA found at the scene, pointing out that DNA can remain, even after laundering.

On cross-examination, Assistant District Attorney Brittany Smith pointed out the trial transcripts of Wecht saying multiple times in his testimony that DNA testing does not show when DNA may have been deposited.

The defense sought to keep Wecht’s testimony out of the trial, and Knafelc initially ruled Wecht’s testimony was inadmissible. The prosecution appealed that decision, and in October 2013, the Pennsylvania Superior Court overturned the decision and ruled that Wecht could testify.

James Ross, who is now a Beaver County Court judge, represented Hopkins at trial. Ross was called to testify Tuesday.

Cogan questioned Ross extensively about the strategy he employed during the trial and what lines of questioning he pursed while direct or cross examining witnesses. Cogan also questioned Ross regarding why he did not object to certain testimony or evidence during the trial.

The hearing provided some insight into the strategies used by the defense. Ross testified about his attempts to cast doubt in the jurors’ minds by attempting to implicate two other men: Walsh’s estranged husband and a man she had met at a bar the night of her death. He also testified he attempted to cast doubt on the credibility of one of the state police forensic experts who testified during the trial.

Ross said Tuesday that during the trial and in his closing arguments, he tried to put forward “issues that were strong and valid.”

“I liked Mr. Hopkins very much. I tried to do everything I could,” Ross said.

Hopkins filed an appeal in Pennsylvania Superior Court following his conviction in which he argued the evidence against him was insufficient, that the trial court abused its discretion in “failing to find that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence” and that the trial court erred in failing to suppress evidence, namely the cup obtained from the trash. The appeal contained an argument that Hopkins had an expectation of privacy in regards to the trashcan.

In August 2015, Superior Court denied Hopkins’ appeal and in a written opinion said the county court did not abuse its discretion and that Hopkins had no reasonable expectation of privacy in regards to a trashcan in a public building.

Attorney for both sides will submit legal briefs to Knafelc, who will make a decision on the appeal petition at a later date.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.